DOCSLIB.ORG

European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy XIII-1 | 2021 Pragmatist Legacies in Aesthetics A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks Paolo Valore Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/2331 DOI: 10.4000/ejpap.2331 ISSN: 2036-4091 Publisher Associazione Pragma Electronic reference Paolo Valore, “A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks”, European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy [Online], XIII-1 | 2021, Online since 02 April 2021, connection on 04 April 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/2331 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap. 2331 This text was automatically generated on 4 April 2021. Author retains copyright and grants the European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks 1 A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks Paolo Valore 1. A Confusing Picture 1 In “Things and Their Place in Theories,” Quine labels himself as “a robust realist” for his “unswerving belief in external things – people, nerve endings, sticks, stones” as well as “atoms and electrons and […] classes,” in connection with his naturalism and his conception of science (Quine 1981: 21). According to this picture, being a “realist” means having a certain belief in the nature of the kinds of entities we are assuming, such as physical objects or abstract entities; and it is Quine’s “unswerving belief” what makes his realism “robust.” Curiously enough, both his conception of entities, physical or abstract, and his naturalistic conception of science granted Quine the label of “anti- realist.” According to Peter Hylton, for instance, in Quine’s philosophy “there is no more to an object than its role in the theory,” and “we can systematically switch objects from role to role. The result is ontological relativity. […] The possibility of this sort of switching, if granted, seems to undermine realism by indicating that we do not really know what we are being realistic about; we feel as if we are in the odd position of insisting that something must exist but having to acknowledge that we cannot say what” (Hylton 2004: 144). Again, according to Hylton, being an “antirealist” means having a certain belief in the nature of the kinds of entities we are assuming. The situation gets even more confused when we recall that, notwithstanding the “robust realism” Quine ascribed to himself, he was criticized by Armstrong (1980) for his antirealistic rejection of universals, for instance through the refusal of an ontological commitment to predicates. According to Armstrong, Quine is giving to predicates “what has been said to be the privilege of the harlot: power without responsibility. The predicate is informative, it makes a vital contribution to telling us what is the case, the world is different if it is different, yet ontologically it is supposed not to commit us. Nice work: if you can get it” (Armstrong 1980: 443). Armstrong in turn describes himself as a realist thanks to his Platonic belief in the existence of universals, but European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, XIII-1 | 2021 A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks 2 Armstrong himself has been considered an “anti-realist” (in ontology, or perhaps metaphysics) for his rejection of Platonic uninstantiated universals. This gets all messed up, when we consider that, according to the literature, being a Platonist means being a realist in ontology (and perhaps in metaphysics) and that Platonism (together with all its Idealistic reworked versions) is considered the most paradigmatic version of the rejection of realism (taken as anti-idealism). 2. A Meta-Philosophical Approach 2 One of the complications of a clear evaluation of different positions in metaphysics and ontology is discrepancy in terminology and variance, if not incongruity, of basic concepts associated to relevant notions. This is a common problem in philosophy, but it seems that it has been exacerbated in recent debates about different clusters of positions called “realism.” The topic of realism and anti-realism is clearly central in many contemporary debates, especially in pragmatism and neo-pragmatism and American philosophy in general (e.g., Peirce, Sellars, Dummett, Putnam, …), not to mention ontology, philosophy of mathematics (Platonism, fictionalism, …) and so on. Evidently, a significant reconstruction of the various systems (not even of the most important authors) and the many possible foundations and justifications of “realism” is out of the scope of this paper (a well-done comprehensive synopsis of versions of “realism” can be easily found in several other papers and encyclopedia entries, for instance Miller 2019). Instead of trying to infer a definition of “realism,” as if by induction, from the countless pictures given by philosophers identifying (or identified by others) as “realists” in the history of philosophy or in a catalogue of current debates, here I offer a taxonomy provided by a conceptual analysis of the notion of “realism” in what I think are its sub-concepts, recognizing three different conceptual frameworks. 3 The assessment of the notion I am trying to carry out here will be strictly delimited and essentially framed within the bounds of conceptual analysis, will be meta-philosophical in essence, and will not engage in a presentation of what I may judge are the most relevant philosophical positions nor will it engage in a discussion or an evaluation of the best arguments for or against a particular philosophical version of what is called “realism.” 3. How not to Confuse Three Different Kinds of Confusion 4 Philosophers and historians of philosophy tend to assume that they have an intuitive grasp on the notion of realism and on what they mean when they label some other philosophers, or themselves, as realist. Unfortunately, when we try to spell out the basic intuition inherent in this concept, we meet a significant variance in the core meaning. Such a variance in the concept of “realism” can be understood in (at least) three different ways, the first two of which are not directly my focus here (even though they can still play a secondary role at the level with which I am concerned). European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, XIII-1 | 2021 A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks 3 Three kinds of variance in “realism” 5 Firstly, the confusion in terminology can be trivially connected with the fact that philosophers may request different sets of conditions in order for a philosophical position to be acknowledged as actual “realism” or a good version of realism. In this first sense, it seems that the variation in the meaning associated with the concept of “realism” is a variation among different realist philosophical systems. The clearest way we encounter this variance is in the diachronical consideration of philosophy: for instance, when we realize that the “realism,” let us say, Nicolai Hartmann had in mind was obviously different than the “realism” Herbart defended. This seems related to the difference of philosophical theories rather than a stratification of different core meanings associated to the very concept of “realism.” The clarification required to explicate the different meanings of Hartmann’s realism and Herbart’s realism is a clarification of their philosophical theories rather than a conceptual analysis of the notion of realism as such. I call this divergence the philosophical variance in the meaning of realism (PVR), as it involves different conceptions of realism as a whole philosophical system. 6 The second one is the contrast among the set of conditions requested to be a realist of the correct kind, which can be expanded, modified or contracted according, again, to the choice of a particular conception, and perhaps to a particular philosophical “taste,” with no need to recall a whole philosophical system as in PVR. For instance, we may distinguish an “external realism,” an “internal realism,” or a “naïve realism.” This doesn’t recap the whole philosophy of a particular thinker or a particular philosophical school, as it is the case with “Herbart’s Realism” or “Marx’ Realism” and gets closer to a general definition (or, it seems, a cluster of different definitions) of what is considered essential to be a realist. Still it requires a proper version of realism as opposed to other, less satisfactory versions of weaker realism. I call this divergence the variance in strength in the meaning of realism (SVR), as it distributes kinds of realism on a scale and picks European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, XIII-1 | 2021 A Proposed Taxonomy of Realism in Conceptual Frameworks 4 the correct version of realism assigning the label of actual realism to a certain point in the series. 7 The third sense of the variance that I have in mind does not involve the request of actuality, as in the previous two cases. This is why I think it is connected at a deeper level to the core meaning of the very notion of “realism” rather than the particular, better or worse, form of a philosophical version of realism. This third sense can be, for instance, clarified in connection to the correlated concepts we associate to the notion of “realism” and it seems linked to the particular framework in which we are using the notion. For instance, in ontology we contrast being a realist with being an antirealist (or a nihilist) while in epistemology we tend to contrast being a realist with being an idealist. I call this divergence in the meaning of realism the variance in conceptual frameworks (CVR), as it involves different roles of the notion of “realism” in different theoretical contexts. 8 It is the clarification of CVR that is my focus here, but I may still use PVR and SVR (mainly, by contrast) in order to get my results.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parts of Persons Identity and Persistence in a Perdurantist World
    UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI MILANO Doctoral School in Philosophy and Human Sciences (XXXI Cycle) Department of Philosophy “Piero Martinetti” Parts of Persons Identity and persistence in a perdurantist world Ph.D. Candidate Valerio BUONOMO Tutors Prof. Giuliano TORRENGO Prof. Paolo VALORE Coordinator of the Doctoral School Prof. Marcello D’AGOSTINO Academic year 2017-2018 1 Content CONTENT ........................................................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1. PERSONAL IDENTITY AND PERSISTENCE...................................................................... 8 1.1. The persistence of persons and the criteria of identity over time .................................. 8 1.2. The accounts of personal persistence: a standard classification ................................... 14 1.2.1. Mentalist accounts of personal persistence ............................................................................ 15 1.2.2. Somatic accounts of personal persistence .............................................................................. 15 1.2.3. Anti-criterialist accounts of personal persistence ................................................................... 16 1.3. The metaphysics of persistence: the mereological account .........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Topics on General and Formal Ontology
    Topics on General and Formal Ontology Paolo Valore Editor ESTRATTO DAL VOLUME Polimetrica INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHER Paolo Valore (ed.), Topics on General and Formal Ontology, 67-77 ©2006 Polimetrica International Scientific Publisher Monza/Italy Book series: Open Access Publications (http://www.polimetrica.com) ISBN 978-88-7699-029-8 Electronic Edition ISBN 978-88-7699-028-1 Printed Edition 2006 Polimetrica ® S.a.s. Corso Milano, 26 20052 Monza - Milan - Italy Phone ++39/0392301829 Web site: www.polimetrica.com The electronic edition of this book is not sold and is made available in free access. Every contribution is published according to the terms of “Polimetrica License B”. “Polimetrica License B” gives anyone the possibility to distribute the contents of the work, provided that the authors of the work and the publisher are always recognised and mentioned. It does not allow use of the contents of the work for commercial purposes or for profit. Polimetrica Publisher has the exclusive right to publish and sell the contents of the work in paper and electronic format and by any other means of publication. Additional rights on the contents of the work are the author’s property. Dear Reader, many thanks for your interest in our free books! All our activities are aimed at generating, contributing to or disseminating accessible knowledge to anyone in the world who might be interested, without obstacles concerning economic disadvantages. We’re trying to build a new model of scientific publishing that embraces economic self-subsistence, openness, and fairness (Open Access Publications). If you think our efforts are worthy, you could support us by ordering the printed edition of this book (available at www.amazon.com, www.polimetrica.com, etc.).
    [Show full text]
  • Word and Object” 50 Years Later
    “Word and Object” 50 Years Later Paolo Valore In the fifty years of the publication of Word and Object, an international conference was held in Rome on the 28th and 29th of May 2010, to celebrate one of America’s most fa- mous and influential philosophers and mathematicians: W.V.O. Quine. The conference was sponsored by the University of Rome "La Sapienza", APhEx (Analytical and Philo- sophical Explanation), SFI (Società Filosofica Italiana) and SIFA (Società Italiana Filosofia Analitica). The first day started with the Plenary Session, in which Stephen L. White (Tufts Uni- versity, Medford, US), talked about "Indeterminacy of Translation: Fifty Years Later". According to Quine, when translation is concerned, the only objective facts are those that make up the overall pattern of associations of sentences with one another and with nonverbal stimulation. The Gavagai example is constructed as a one-word sentence that would have the same stimulus meaning in two very different translations; the problem occurs when we try to equate terms in the language being translated and our own. Since Quine thinks that the physical disposition to respond are the only objective facts and that they are exhausted by stimulus meaning, he concludes that there is indeterminacy. White thus considered someone who uses "bachelor" as an observational term example to be applied on the basis of an observational gestalt; he would mean what we mean but he would think he has some clairvoyant insight as to who is and who is not a bache- lor. On the basis of the evidence Quine allows, it seems that all the questions we would be allowed to ask, as translators, to determine the correct hypothesis might be inconclu- sive.
    [Show full text]
  • Original File Was Articolo Phpwmthnc.Tex
    Paolo Valore NOTHING IS PART OF EVERYTHING www.giornaledifilosofia.net – Gennaio 2012 www.giornaledifilosofia.net 1 NOTHING IS PART OF EVERYTHING 2 Paolo Valore «Lui in sé non vale altro che nulla, e tutti i nulli dell’universo sono eguali ad un sol nulla in quanto alla loro sostanza e valore» (Leonardo da Vinci, “Trattato della pittura”) 1.Definitions I will assume the language of general Extensional mereology, that is, a mereology without intensional operators (such as modal or temporal functions)3. The axiom system for mereology requires a single primitive concept: the parthood relation, symbolized as . The -relation4 is assumed to be (a) reflexive, (b) antisymmetric and (c) transitive5. Note that the parthood relation is a partial ordering, as defined in set theory6. Since parthood is analogous to inclusion, I can define a relation somehow analogous to proper 1 This article has been written during a semester at the Department of Philosophy of NYU, New York, as a Fulbright Visiting Scholar. I want to thank my students at the University of Milan for the discussions on section 6. A former version of some ideas of this paper has been presented in Valore (2008). 2 Department of Philosophy, University of Milan. 3 Extensionality essentially amounts to the assumption that two entities are identical if and only if they have the same parts. This means I will give up any distinction between entities made up of the same parts in different order (for any meaning of “order", both spatial or temporal). This assumption mirrors the fundamental principle of set theory: two sets are identical if and only if they have the same members.
    [Show full text]
  • Topics on General and Formal Ontology
    Topics on General and Formal Ontology Paolo Valore Editor ESTRATTO DAL VOLUME Polimetrica INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHER Paolo Valore (ed.), Topics on General and Formal Ontology, 11-13 ©2006 Polimetrica International Scientific Publisher Monza/Italy Book series: Open Access Publications (http://www.polimetrica.com) ISBN 978-88-7699-029-8 Electronic Edition ISBN 978-88-7699-028-1 Printed Edition 2006 Polimetrica ® S.a.s. Corso Milano, 26 20052 Monza - Milan - Italy Phone ++39/0392301829 Web site: www.polimetrica.com The electronic edition of this book is not sold and is made available in free access. Every contribution is published according to the terms of “Polimetrica License B”. “Polimetrica License B” gives anyone the possibility to distribute the contents of the work, provided that the authors of the work and the publisher are always recognised and mentioned. It does not allow use of the contents of the work for commercial purposes or for profit. Polimetrica Publisher has the exclusive right to publish and sell the contents of the work in paper and electronic format and by any other means of publication. Additional rights on the contents of the work are the author’s property. Dear Reader, many thanks for your interest in our free books! All our activities are aimed at generating, contributing to or disseminating accessible knowledge to anyone in the world who might be interested, without obstacles concerning economic disadvantages. We’re trying to build a new model of scientific publishing that embraces economic self-subsistence, openness, and fairness (Open Access Publications). If you think our efforts are worthy, you could support us by ordering the printed edition of this book (available at www.amazon.com, www.polimetrica.com, etc.).
    [Show full text]
  • New Perspectives on Quine's “Word and Object”
    New Perspectives on Quine’s “Word and Object” Francesca Ervas University of Cagliari Vera Tripodi University of Barcelona BIBLID [0873-626X (2012) 32; pp. 317-322] This special issue collects a selection of the papers presented at the International Colloquium Word and Object, 50 Years Later, which took place in Rome on May 28-29, 2010. In the fiftieth year since the publication of Word and Object, the conference aimed at celebrating one of the most famous and influential philosophers and mathemati- cians of the 20th Century: Willard Van Orman Quine. The purpose of the conference, organised by the University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ and the Research Group APhEx (Analytical and Philosophical Expla- nation), was to discuss and explore some of the major Quinean the- ses. This volume collects the contributions of Marianna Antonutti Marfori, Jacob Busch & Andrea Sereni, Alberto Voltolini, Stephen White, and Giancarlo Zanet, who were speakers at the conference. The papers are unified by a common thread that is represented by the Quinean philosophical heritage and take their stance within the differ- ent areas of the current philosophical debate on this issue. Quinean theses marked several fields of philosophy and, since its publication, Word and Object has become a landmark in the canon of analytical philosophy. During the two-day conference, at least three subjects came to the foreground, especially for their potential to still unveil, after half a century, some common prejudices in the philoso- phy of language. First, the thesis of indeterminacy of translation, which questioned the definition of the object of translation itself, the notion of a translation manual and the concept of translation equiva- lence.
    [Show full text]
  • European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, IX-1
    European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy IX-1 | 2017 Pragmatism and Psychologism Rosa M. Calcaterra and Roberta Dreon (dir.) Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/985 DOI: 10.4000/ejpap.985 ISSN: 2036-4091 Publisher Associazione Pragma Electronic reference Rosa M. Calcaterra and Roberta Dreon (dir.), European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, IX-1 | 2017, « Pragmatism and Psychologism » [Online], Online since 10 July 2017, connection on 24 September 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/985 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/ ejpap.985 This text was automatically generated on 24 September 2020. Author retains copyright and grants the European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Symposia. Pragmatism and Psychologism Introduction to Pragmatism and Psychologism Rosa M. Calcaterra and Roberta Dreon Anti-Psychologism and Neutrality The Radical Empiricism of Husserl and James Roberta Lanfredini Psychologism and the Self Vincente Sanfelix Vidarte “Was Peirce a Genuine Anti-Psychologist in Logic?” Claudine Tiercelin Jung and Peirce Towards a Psychosynthesis? Giovanni Maddalena Experimental Psychology and the Practice of Logic Charles S. Peirce and the Charge of Psychologism, 1869-1885 Claudia Cristalli Habit Beyond Psychology The Evolution Of The Concept Aleksandar Feodorov Security as Completeness A Peircean Semiotic Reading of the Psychology of Attachment Matteo Santarelli Essays Sen and Mead on Identity, Agency, and Economic Behavior Guido Baggio Dewey, Second Nature, Social Criticism, and the Hegelian Heritage Italo Testa Book Review Rosa M. CALCATERRA, Giovanni MADDALENA & Giancarlo MARCHETTI (eds.), Il pragmatismo.
    [Show full text]
  • Resemblance, Exemplification, and Ontology
    RESEMBLANCE, EXEMPLIFICATION, AND ONTOLOGY Paolo Valore ABSTRACT: According to the quantificational (neo-)Quinean model in meta-ontology, the question of ontology boils down to the question of whether a sortal property is exemplified. I address some complications that arise when we try to build a philosophical reconstruction of the link between individuals and kinds displayed in the exemplification relation from the point of view of conceptualism about kinds and having in mind this stand in ontology. I distinguish two notions of resemblance, object-to-object and object-to-kind, and show the problems with both of them. Finally, I argue for a better awareness of the implicit “bias” involved in the very notion of “resemblance”, without indulging in Quine’s veto towards this notion. I. Notwithstanding the recent neo-Aristotelian renaissance (Schaffer 2009; Tahko 2012; Tahko 2012; Correia & Schnieder 2012; Hoeltje, Schnieder and Steinberg 2013; Novotný and Novák 2014) and the deflationist neo- Carnapian view that never really went away (Hirsch 2011; Price 2009; Thomasson 2015), contemporary literature in meta-ontology seems to confirm that the quantificational approach is still the "normal paradigm".1 According to the classic, (neo-)Quinean quantificational approach to ontology, the question of what exists is to be solved through a paraphrase into canonical notation of our theory T, assigning the ontological commitment of T to the values of the quantified variables of the (true) sentences of T. From this point of view, the form of the ontological commitment of a sentence such as “Fs exist” is “There are Fs”, understood as “There is at least one x such that Fx”.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF (Italiano)
    Rivista Italiana di Filosofia Analitica Junior 5:2 (2014) ISSN 2037-4445 CC http://www.rifanalitica.it Patrocinata dalla Società Italiana di Filosofia Analitica EDITORIALE Pietro Angelo Casati, Mattia Sorgon Il presente numero di RIFAJ è dedicato alla metafisica. Non abbiamo stabilito a priori alcun disegno che privilegiasse particolari sottotemi intorno a cui strutturarlo, tuttavia so- no accidentalmente emersi alcuni leitmotiv che gli conferiscono, rispetto al tema principale, ulteriore uniformità, rendendolo particolarmente ricco di rimandi interni. Per cominciare, un tema ricorrente è quello dei rapporti tra la metafisica analitica e alcuni grandi filosofi del passato, tra cui Aristotele, Tommaso d’Aquino e Hegel. Enrico Berti, inter- vistato da Pietro Casati, ha illustrato le relazioni tra filosofia analitica e pensiero aristotelico, svolgendo peraltro una serie di limpide considerazioni circa i diversi possibili approcci alla storia della filosofia in generale. Riguardo alla presenza di Tommaso nel dibattito contemporaneo, Fabio Ceravolo ha invece recensito To be o esse: La questione dell’essere nel tomismo analitico, di Giovanni Ventimiglia. Anche l’intervista a Francesco Berto, sempre di Pietro Casati e Fabio Ceravolo, è par- zialmente legata al “recupero”, da parte di alcuni filosofi analitici, della dialettica hegeliana. Una parte altrettanto consistente dell’intervista è dedicata a più recenti interessi di Berto, in particolare metafisica modale e oggetti inesistenti. Un secondo motivo presente diffusamente in questo numero è l’interesse che abbiamo rivolto ad alcune iniziative condotte da giovani studenti, dottorandi o ricercatori, sia in Italia che all’estero. Leda Berio ha intervistato Paolo Valore, coordinatore nazionale del progetto di ricerca OntoForMat1, che si propone l’elaborazione di un vero e proprio sistema sinottico che individui fondamenti teorici e paradigmi classici all’interno dell’ontologia allo scopo di sistematizzare le relazioni fra le posizioni correnti.
    [Show full text]
  • En El Tricentenario Del Fallecimiento De Leibniz
    CON-TEXTOS KANTIANOS. International Journal of Philosophy N.o 3, Junio 2016, pp. 514-533 ISSN: 2386-7655 CTK 3 SEGUNDO BOLETÍN INFORMATIVO JUNIO DE 2016 *Congresos* Congreso de Filosofía Moderna: En el tricentenario del fallecimiento de Leibniz Fecha: 28 – 29/01/2016 Lugar: Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades de la Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, México Información: − Organizador: Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades de la UPAEP Keynote Alejandro Herrera Ibáñez (UNAM) speakers: Juan Antonio Nicolás (Universidad de Granada) Leonardo Ruiz Gómez (Universidad Panamericana) Francisco Javier Iracheta Fernández (ITESM, Puebla) Conmemorando los 300 años de fallecimiento de Leibniz, el “último sabio universal”, la Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades de la Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla se congratula de invitar a todos los especialistas en filosofía moderna a participar en el Congreso de Filosofía Moderna. CFP: Hasta el 20 de octubre del 2015. Enviar a: [email protected]. Se solicita atentamente enviar, en español o en inglés, un resumen de entre 300 y 500 palabras, el cual puede versar sobre cualquier temática relacionada con la Historia de la Filosofía Moderna, especialmente aquellos trabajos relacionados con la filosofía de Leibniz. Cada ponente contará con 20 minutos de exposición. Estos resúmenes serán sometidos a arbitraje ciego. Para ello se pide enviar dos archivos, uno para los datos del ponente y otro con el resumen de la ponencia. a. Datos del ponente i. Nombre completo ii. Universidad o Institución afiliada iii. Nombre de la ponencia iv. Dirección de correo electrónico v. Dirección postal b. Resumen de la ponencia i.
    [Show full text]
  • Paolo Valore CURRICULUM VITAE
    Paolo Valore CURRICULUM VITAE a) Attività di ricerca e pubblicazioni scientifiche A.1. ABILITAZIONE SCIENTIFICA Abilitazione scientifica Settore 11/C5 Storia della filosofia, Seconda fascia: dal 05/02/2014 al 05/02/2020 Abilitazione scientifica Settore 11/C5 Storia della filosofia, Prima fascia: dal 28/03/2017 al 28/03/2023 Abilitazione scientifica Settore 11/C1 Filosofia teoretica, Seconda fascia: dal 19/12/2013 al 19/12/2019 Abilitazione scientifica Settore 11/C1 Filosofia teoretica, Prima fascia: dal 22/03/2018 al 22/03/2024 A.2. ATTRIBUZIONE DI INCARICHI DI RICERCA E DI INSEGNAMENTO PRESSO ATENEI E ISTITUTI DI RICERCA ESTERI 2001/2002: King's College, University of London, Department of Philosophy (London, UK); (12 mesi: dal 26/03/2001 al 26/03/2002) Visiting Academic Position; 2011/2012: NYU New York University, Department of Philosophy (New York, NY, USA) Invited Visiting Scholar (6 mesi: dal 15/09/2011 al 15/03/2012); 2014/2015: Columbia University, Department of Philosophy (New York, NY, USA) Invited Visiting Scholar (7 mesi: dal 01/01/2015 al 31/07/2015); 2016/2017: National Research University Higher School of Economics (Mosca, Federazione Russa) Invited Visiting Professor (dal 19/0/2017 al 03/05/2017); 2017/2018: Universidad Complutense (Madrid, Spagna) Invited Visiting Researcher (2 mesi: dal 09-01-2018 al 28-02- 2018); 2018/2019: Rutgers University, Department of Philosophy (New Brunswick, NJ, USA) Invited Visiting Scholar (6 mesi: dal 11/01/2019 al 11/07/2019). A.3. ATTRAZIONE FONDI E DIREZIONE DI GRUPPI DI RICERCA AMMESSI A FINANZIAMENTI Responsabilità scientifica nazionale del Progetto interuniversitario FIRB - Programma FUTURO IN RICERCA “OntoForMat.
    [Show full text]
  • Resemblance: a Logico-Philosophical Analysis
    RESEMBLANCE: A LOGICO-PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS ISKENDER_ TAS»DELEN NOVEMBER 2005 RESEMBLANCE: A LOGICO-PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF THE MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY ISKENDER_ TAS»DELEN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY NOVEMBER 2005 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Sencer Ayata Director I certify that this thesis satis¯es all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Inam_ Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Assoc. Prof. Dr. David GrÄunberg Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. David GrÄunberg (METU, PHIL) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Erdin»cSayan (METU, PHIL) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ayhan Sol (METU, PHIL) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Erdal Cengiz (DTCF, PHIL) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Zekiye Kutlusoy (Uluda¸g U,Ä PHIL) I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Iskender_ Ta»sdelen Signature : iii Abstract Resemblance: A Logico-Philosophical Analysis Ta»sdelen, Iskender_ Ph.D., Department of Philosophy Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. David GrÄunberg November 2005, 101 pages Indiscernibility, interchangeability and resemblance relations may be named as weak identity relations or identity-like relations.
    [Show full text]